Business as usual. Corporate strategies in response to allegations of crime.
The project's objective is to study the strategies employed by three businesses (Telia Sonera, Lundin Petroleum and Stora Enso) when defending themselves against allegations of crime. Is it possible to distinguish differences in the companies' defence strategies across different periods of time, in different forums and in relation to different target groups? How may institutional and social structures affect the types of defence mechanisms that are utilised and in what ways may these defence mechanisms influence the companies' opportunities to engage in crime? The defensive strategies employed will be analysed on the basis of Stanley Cohen's theoretical work on processes of denial and neutralisation techniques. The point of departure for the analysis is how the businesses' defences are expressed in e.g. media, press releases and criminal investigations. Frame analysis will be employed to analyse how the strategies are framed and in order to understand the structures that form the foundation of these frames. Defence mechanisms do not arise in a vacuum but may rather be assumed to be accepted within a social and cultural context. The project has the potential to produce theoretical developments, in part regarding Cohen's theoretical framework, which will be applied in a new context (Swedish businesses), and in part by developing an understanding of how defence mechanisms make it possible for businesses to engage in crime.
Final report
Final Report Business as usual. Corporate defence strategies in connection with allegations of crime. (Riksbankens Jubileumsfond, dnr. P15-0176:1)
The project’s objective has been to study the strategies employed by three Swedish companies when defending themselves against allegations of crime and the ways in which these strategies may create opportunities for businesses to engage in crime. We chose to study three companies that have been a focus of media attention: Telia Sonera, Lundin Petroleum and Stora Enso. These businesses were chosen in part because they have ties to Sweden and have been publicly accused of engaging in criminal activities, and partly because they differ from one another with respect to ownership structure, sector, and the types of crime of which they have been accused.
We have collected and analyzed a very comprehensive material for the three companies (a total of 500 news articles and over 300 publications). The material includes only direct statements from the companies themselves. In addition, we have collected material from the trial in Stockholm District Court against three former employees at Telia, a trial that lasted 42 days during the fall of 2018. In addition to data from the trial, we have had access to all files of the preliminary investigation, which includes a total of 16 CDs, which corresponds to approximately 40,000 documents. In the judgment announced in February 2019, all defendants were acquitted. The judgment has been appealed and will be addressed in the Court of Appeal in the fall in 2020.
The original plan included also following the trial against the two persons from Lundin Petroleum who were, and still are, suspected of assisting in grave violations of international law, and since 2018 also suspected for obstructing the course of justice by threaten witnesses. The preliminary investigation has been ongoing since 2010, and has not been finished. The decision to prosecute is not expected until fall 2020. Thus, we have not been able to follow the plan to study that trial as well. As there is preliminary investigation confidentiality, we have not been able to get access to that material. Another deviation from the original project plan is that we have mainly focused on two of the companies, Lundin Petroleum and Telia. The wide availability of data concerning these two companies have of course been positive, but it has also meant that we did not within the project timeframe, pay attention to Stora Enso the way we intended to. We have collected data on the company, but so far only included it one of the publications (Schoultz & Flyghed, 2019a).
With a unique and extensive empirical data, the project has contributed to a relatively unexplored criminological research field. We have illustrated the complexity of corporate crime, and of how it can contribute to our understanding of the accounts that are used by organizations and individuals when they face accusations of criminal wrongdoing. Among other things, it has emerged that the Nordic context, has been of importance in corporate neutralizations when they have been accused of committing crimes (see Flyghed & Schoultz, 2019, Schoultz & Flyghed, 2016). By analyzing the companies' defense-strategies for more than a decade, we have also been able to demonstrate major differences in their handling of the allegations, and to draw conclusions as to what these differences may be due to. We have seen how corporate neutralizations develop over time and how these processes can be understood based on the corporate ownership structure and the crimes they are accused of. While Telia has gone from denial to recognition of bribery, Lundin Petroleum has maintained their categorical denial of any involvement in crimes against humanity. Lundin has also used other forms of defense, including condemnation and attacks on its critics (Schoultz & Flyghed, 2020). However, both companies have referred to the positive impact they have had in the places where they have been operating, that is appealing to higher loyalties. In both Uzbekistan (Telia) and Sudan (Lundin), they have defended the risks they have taken in connection with their establishment in these countries, that they have created prosperity for the country's inhabitants, and in Lundin's case that they also have contributed to the peace process (Schoultz & Flyghed, 2016). Furthermore, we have distinguished between, accounts framed in order to respond to the allegations of criminality by, on the one hand, Telia (organizational defense), and, on the other, its former executives (individual defense) and how the different forums (the public discourse and the legal process) have shaped the accounts used by the corporation and the prosecuted former executives (Schoultz & Flyghed, 2020b).
Theoretically, we have made a contribution to the field, by developing the understanding of corporate defense strategies in accusations of crime, and we have also introduced new theoretical concepts and a typology (see Schoultz & Flyghed 2019a).
During the course of the project, several new research issues have arisen that we hopefully will have the opportunity to work with in the future. The observations during the Telia trial raised questions about lawyers specializing in so-called "white-collar crime" and their work before the prosecution was brought (pre-charge stage). The same applies to the legal arguments in court in prosecutions related to companies, the prosecutor's difficulties in investigating, prosecuting and getting people linked to companies convicted of crime and how, different types of expertise have been used in connection with companies being accused of crime. This can apply both in connection with legal processes and in connection with business communication. The latter also relates to the issue of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) as a form of preventive / proactive denial. This aspect is addressed in Elin Jönsson's article, which were developed within the project (Jönsson 2018). She worked as an assistant within the project for two months in 2018. In 2019 she was employed as a doctoral student at the Department of Criminology with CSR as the topic for her thesis. The head of the project is one of her two supervisors. Another interesting aspect is how different kinds of expertise have been used in connection with the companies’ defense. This may apply in connection with legal proceedings as well as in other areas.
The project's results have been presented at the following national and international conferences:
a) Flyghed, J. & Schoultz, I. (2016) Using techniques of neutralisations to understand corporate crime (Keynote/plenary speakers), Scandinavian Research Council for Criminology´s 58. Research Seminar, 1-4 May 2016 in Bifröst, Iceland.
b) Schoultz, I. (2016) Doing business for a “higher loyalty”? How Swedish transnational corporations neutralise allegations of crime. 44rd Annual Conference of the European Group for the Study of Deviance and Social Control, Braga, Portugal, 2 Sep 2016.
c) Flyghed, J. (2016) Doing business for a “higher loyalty”? 16th Annual Conference of the European Society of Criminology 21-24 September 2016 Münster, Germany.
d) Flyghed, J. (2016) Doing business for a higher loyalty? The case of Lundin in Sudan, Human Rights conference Malmö, November 18th 2016.
e) Flyghed, J. (2016) Doing business for a higher loyalty? The case of Lundin in Sudan, December 15th 2016 Faculty of Law Stockholm University.
f) Schoultz, I. (2016) Doing business for a “higher loyalty”? How Swedish transnational corporations neutralise allegations of crime. 72nd Annual Meeting American Society of Criminology, New Orleans, United States, 17 Nov 2016.
g) Flyghed, J. (2017) Doing business for a higher loyalty, presentation Forum for Security Research, 22 May 2017, Stockholm University.
h) Two upcoming conferences where we will summarize the project: RCSL (Research Committee on Sociology of Law), Lund University 24-26 August 2020; and European Society of Criminology, Bukarest 8-12 September 2020.
Results from the project have also been published in peer-review journals and book chapters (see publication list).
The project has contributed to an increased attention in Scandinavian criminology for crimes by the powerful; that is, big corporations and states. In addition, we have used results from the project in teaching, both at bachelor level and advanced level. This has particularly been the case in the Master's Course Organized Crime at the Criminological Department. When the course was running in Spring 2018, the students delivered very good examination papers; four of them were particularly good. These four students were asked if they would like to rework their papers into articles. They agreed, and with Flyghed and Schoultz as supervisors, they succeeded in transforming their papers into articles. These four articles, together with a co-authored article by Flyghed and Schoultz, were after the usual peer-review assessment published in a special issue concerning Crimes of the powerful by Nordisk Tidskrift for Kriminalvidenskab (no. 3/2019). All five articles are thus produced within the project.
The project’s objective has been to study the strategies employed by three Swedish companies when defending themselves against allegations of crime and the ways in which these strategies may create opportunities for businesses to engage in crime. We chose to study three companies that have been a focus of media attention: Telia Sonera, Lundin Petroleum and Stora Enso. These businesses were chosen in part because they have ties to Sweden and have been publicly accused of engaging in criminal activities, and partly because they differ from one another with respect to ownership structure, sector, and the types of crime of which they have been accused.
We have collected and analyzed a very comprehensive material for the three companies (a total of 500 news articles and over 300 publications). The material includes only direct statements from the companies themselves. In addition, we have collected material from the trial in Stockholm District Court against three former employees at Telia, a trial that lasted 42 days during the fall of 2018. In addition to data from the trial, we have had access to all files of the preliminary investigation, which includes a total of 16 CDs, which corresponds to approximately 40,000 documents. In the judgment announced in February 2019, all defendants were acquitted. The judgment has been appealed and will be addressed in the Court of Appeal in the fall in 2020.
The original plan included also following the trial against the two persons from Lundin Petroleum who were, and still are, suspected of assisting in grave violations of international law, and since 2018 also suspected for obstructing the course of justice by threaten witnesses. The preliminary investigation has been ongoing since 2010, and has not been finished. The decision to prosecute is not expected until fall 2020. Thus, we have not been able to follow the plan to study that trial as well. As there is preliminary investigation confidentiality, we have not been able to get access to that material. Another deviation from the original project plan is that we have mainly focused on two of the companies, Lundin Petroleum and Telia. The wide availability of data concerning these two companies have of course been positive, but it has also meant that we did not within the project timeframe, pay attention to Stora Enso the way we intended to. We have collected data on the company, but so far only included it one of the publications (Schoultz & Flyghed, 2019a).
With a unique and extensive empirical data, the project has contributed to a relatively unexplored criminological research field. We have illustrated the complexity of corporate crime, and of how it can contribute to our understanding of the accounts that are used by organizations and individuals when they face accusations of criminal wrongdoing. Among other things, it has emerged that the Nordic context, has been of importance in corporate neutralizations when they have been accused of committing crimes (see Flyghed & Schoultz, 2019, Schoultz & Flyghed, 2016). By analyzing the companies' defense-strategies for more than a decade, we have also been able to demonstrate major differences in their handling of the allegations, and to draw conclusions as to what these differences may be due to. We have seen how corporate neutralizations develop over time and how these processes can be understood based on the corporate ownership structure and the crimes they are accused of. While Telia has gone from denial to recognition of bribery, Lundin Petroleum has maintained their categorical denial of any involvement in crimes against humanity. Lundin has also used other forms of defense, including condemnation and attacks on its critics (Schoultz & Flyghed, 2020). However, both companies have referred to the positive impact they have had in the places where they have been operating, that is appealing to higher loyalties. In both Uzbekistan (Telia) and Sudan (Lundin), they have defended the risks they have taken in connection with their establishment in these countries, that they have created prosperity for the country's inhabitants, and in Lundin's case that they also have contributed to the peace process (Schoultz & Flyghed, 2016). Furthermore, we have distinguished between, accounts framed in order to respond to the allegations of criminality by, on the one hand, Telia (organizational defense), and, on the other, its former executives (individual defense) and how the different forums (the public discourse and the legal process) have shaped the accounts used by the corporation and the prosecuted former executives (Schoultz & Flyghed, 2020b).
Theoretically, we have made a contribution to the field, by developing the understanding of corporate defense strategies in accusations of crime, and we have also introduced new theoretical concepts and a typology (see Schoultz & Flyghed 2019a).
During the course of the project, several new research issues have arisen that we hopefully will have the opportunity to work with in the future. The observations during the Telia trial raised questions about lawyers specializing in so-called "white-collar crime" and their work before the prosecution was brought (pre-charge stage). The same applies to the legal arguments in court in prosecutions related to companies, the prosecutor's difficulties in investigating, prosecuting and getting people linked to companies convicted of crime and how, different types of expertise have been used in connection with companies being accused of crime. This can apply both in connection with legal processes and in connection with business communication. The latter also relates to the issue of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) as a form of preventive / proactive denial. This aspect is addressed in Elin Jönsson's article, which were developed within the project (Jönsson 2018). She worked as an assistant within the project for two months in 2018. In 2019 she was employed as a doctoral student at the Department of Criminology with CSR as the topic for her thesis. The head of the project is one of her two supervisors. Another interesting aspect is how different kinds of expertise have been used in connection with the companies’ defense. This may apply in connection with legal proceedings as well as in other areas.
The project's results have been presented at the following national and international conferences:
a) Flyghed, J. & Schoultz, I. (2016) Using techniques of neutralisations to understand corporate crime (Keynote/plenary speakers), Scandinavian Research Council for Criminology´s 58. Research Seminar, 1-4 May 2016 in Bifröst, Iceland.
b) Schoultz, I. (2016) Doing business for a “higher loyalty”? How Swedish transnational corporations neutralise allegations of crime. 44rd Annual Conference of the European Group for the Study of Deviance and Social Control, Braga, Portugal, 2 Sep 2016.
c) Flyghed, J. (2016) Doing business for a “higher loyalty”? 16th Annual Conference of the European Society of Criminology 21-24 September 2016 Münster, Germany.
d) Flyghed, J. (2016) Doing business for a higher loyalty? The case of Lundin in Sudan, Human Rights conference Malmö, November 18th 2016.
e) Flyghed, J. (2016) Doing business for a higher loyalty? The case of Lundin in Sudan, December 15th 2016 Faculty of Law Stockholm University.
f) Schoultz, I. (2016) Doing business for a “higher loyalty”? How Swedish transnational corporations neutralise allegations of crime. 72nd Annual Meeting American Society of Criminology, New Orleans, United States, 17 Nov 2016.
g) Flyghed, J. (2017) Doing business for a higher loyalty, presentation Forum for Security Research, 22 May 2017, Stockholm University.
h) Two upcoming conferences where we will summarize the project: RCSL (Research Committee on Sociology of Law), Lund University 24-26 August 2020; and European Society of Criminology, Bukarest 8-12 September 2020.
Results from the project have also been published in peer-review journals and book chapters (see publication list).
The project has contributed to an increased attention in Scandinavian criminology for crimes by the powerful; that is, big corporations and states. In addition, we have used results from the project in teaching, both at bachelor level and advanced level. This has particularly been the case in the Master's Course Organized Crime at the Criminological Department. When the course was running in Spring 2018, the students delivered very good examination papers; four of them were particularly good. These four students were asked if they would like to rework their papers into articles. They agreed, and with Flyghed and Schoultz as supervisors, they succeeded in transforming their papers into articles. These four articles, together with a co-authored article by Flyghed and Schoultz, were after the usual peer-review assessment published in a special issue concerning Crimes of the powerful by Nordisk Tidskrift for Kriminalvidenskab (no. 3/2019). All five articles are thus produced within the project.